Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/22/2019 in all areas

  1. 9 points
    (Inspired by this tumblr thread) We tend to focus a lot on spreading awareness and community building, which are important, but it's also useful to consider other aspects of aro activism, including more political issues. Here are some issues which occurred to me: 1. Marriage: The legal benefits of marriage and lack of alternate options….having some way to declare someone as “family” for purposes of medical leave and such without requiring marriage/romance. Also, partnering with the polyamory community on this because they also face issues with the current system of marriage. 2. Adoption: the adoption system has lots of issues in general with what sort of parents they consider “capable” and how that can be an issue against queer people in general, but more specifically, so single aro people can better adopt children if they wish. 3. Workplace Protections: the queer community in general still needs protections against discrimination, but it does affect us too, and it would be important to include not only that they can’t discriminate against people for their sexual orientation, but also their romantic orientation. (This is the issue I personally would be most concerned about tbh) 4. Education: along with wanting schools to teach about queer identities in general, making sure Aromantic is included. 5. Healthcare: this has some overlap with my first point about “spousal” benefits, but generally making sure aro people aren’t discriminated against in healthcare. This includes mental health, and making sure we could seek therapy without having to educate them about our identities or have our identity medicalized. Additionally, I believe there is something about single people receiving less aggressive treatment options and therefore having worse outcomes, so preventing that kinda thing too. 6. Support Networks: most adults seem to get their social needs met via their romantic partnerships, or find community via religious groups. There’s generally a need for non-denominational groups to provide support and community, because people generally need that sort of thing, and feeling isolated can be detrimental to people’s health. One form of this might be lgbtqa+ community centers in general, ones that are alcohol-free community resource centers (which other parts of the queer community want too). So, what are some other aro-related political issues you can think of? Or, elaborate on any of the aforementioned issues and which things might be more feasible to work on, etc.
  2. 9 points
    I... You do understand what the purpose of politics is, yes..? Politics decide the policies and systems that structure our lives. Everything that has to do with the way we live within our society is a political issue. I can understand being tired of "republicans vs. democrats" or "Brexit vs. EU" type politics, but politics also includes things like "How much of our taxes should go towards education?" or "Should our town sell the town green to real estate developers?" Everything is politicized because when our lives are inherently built within a net of laws and policies and decisions, changes to those things don't just magically spring up overnight via wishful thinking. Everything is a political issue. If we want rights for ourselves, that's a political issue.
  3. 8 points
    bc why not. Here's a link to the picture https://aminoapps.com/c/aroaceunited/page/blog/i-finished-it/PYqr_g0tmudRxPB6gxp4W1vmo7LlqGPXdN
  4. 7 points
    I don't think that "Ace and Aro" implies both, as it is. I think the logo definitely needs work, but, as you said, that takes know-how and time, so doing your best to make it as obvious as possible that it's both is good. I'm in agreement that "Liverpool Area Ace and Aro Group" is pretty generally a good and used format in many areas. The biggest thing is the language change - changing the group name to "Ace and Aro", changing the language used in discussions to "a-spec"...these are all things that need to be done that don't require as much effort, but are important to overall inclusiveness. As much as this suggestion is well intentioned, this isn't practical or...what they were asking? No offense at all, @Mark, but this comes across super unfriendly to the concept of allowing a group to grow to be inclusive, even if it wasn't originally. The group is currently alienating even to me if the group is called "Liverpool Aces Meetup" or something along those, because I identify more with my aro-ness. However, that suggestion is not helpful or practical, unless you're in the Liverpool area and want to start a group yourself.
  5. 6 points
    "Asexual &/or Aromantic" sounds good to me tbh, or at least as good as you can really get in a situation like this- I'm sure people could nitpick for days, but finding something that gets the job done is the real point. Also, speaking as an allosexual aromantic, who heavily advocates for allo aro rights and for us to have spaces we're comfortable in... I, personally, do NOT like the idea of saying that there needs to be a specifically aro group, with a non-ace organizer. It just feels kind of... Exclusionary, but in reverse this time? Yes, it's important to have safe spaces for allo aros/aroaces who identify more with the aro side, where we're not just treated as an add-on to asexuality, but I really don't think we should go so far as to push out our ace siblings. And especially because there are so few allo aros with an offline presence, and because community organization takes work- It'd be nice in theory to have a group run by an allo aro, sure, but for practical purposes? Where are you going to conjure up an allo aro who's willing and able to run a group? I'd much rather have an aro group run by an aroace than no aro group at all. And ideally I think the best thing overall would be to have a group that's co-run by multiple aros, including both aroaces and allo aros.
  6. 5 points
    We've made an AUREA-specific account (this one) to respond to anyone on Arocalypse from now on. This is to make it easier for you all to talk to the Team and understand what's coming from the official organization and what's just coming from us as individuals. You can ping the Team by typing @AUREA.
  7. 5 points
    If you don't feel sexual or romantic attraction then you can definitely identify as aromantic and asexual. It's not always possible to know why you feel the way you do, but orientations are about feelings and are valid whatever your reason is for feeling or not feeling something toward certain genders or anyone.
  8. 5 points
    This is a good list. I'd add awareness about romantic harassment to the work place category (and maybe to education in general) If someone is making romantic gestures at you, like asking you out or bringing romantic gifts even though you've made clear you're not interested in a romantic relationship, that shouldn't be allowed. Could have a lot of common ground with feminism and organizations that seeks to question gender roles and dynamics.
  9. 5 points
    Maybe write aro and ace instead of ace and aro? That's not a big thing, but as some aros are always suspicious that "and aro" had been added to be inclusive but that it is mainly an ace group (in particular aro allo doesn't feel at their place), it could sens a good message for them to write aro first. The problem then is that an aro ace could say exactly the same thing : not an allo as an organiser. Honestly I don't think quality depends on the sexuality of the organizer. But on his desire to incluse everybody and to are aware of all the problematics. Chosing an organiser according to his sexuality would not sent a good message. I understand that aro allo are scared to be left being, but I think it would not be productive.
  10. 5 points
    When I told my sister in law that I was aro she just said “so now what?” And I replied, “nothing, I just continue my non dating life.” And the whole conversation was over. It was so anticlimactic I didn’t know how to feel about it.
  11. 5 points
    I think there's also a lot of individual variation to that. Where all aromantics lack romantic attraction, I think most of us can say "I prioritize x over romance" or "My long term plans involve x rather than romance". What x is will be different to different people, and can be friendship, a successful career, learning to play the cello, etc. (also I'm now imagining the hilarity of the expressions of alloromantics if you tell them that cello playing is more important to you than marriage🤣)
  12. 4 points
    Nice thread! Phrases like "Love is the most beautiful feeling in the world", or whatever you want instead of "beautiful". I'm sure that it's a wonderful feeling, but everytime I hear it sounds like you need it to be happy. The whole concept of "the one" too. Because if you say you are aro, people will just assume that this special person will come and change your identity. Even if it does, you can still be in the grey are of the spectrum. Plus it doesn't invalidate how you felt at the moment. Then not specifically alienating for aros, but things like "I am yours", "You are mine"... I don't get why this is romantic. The idea of belonging to someone else... Just no? Why would anybody want that?
  13. 4 points
    I was just thinking about how weird the identity of aromanticism is really. Something that is defined by an absence. If you were forced to describe it in terms of pressence rather than absence, what words would you use? Personally I think I'd would describe it as a different focus in life. I'm very concerned with my role in society at large rather than just my relationship to one other person.
  14. 4 points
    I don't really look for any specific types of relationships. I want every relationship to grow organically from what we both want. If I found someone who I got along with extremely well and felt comfortable with, I might want to get into a more committed life partner relationship with them. But I wouldn't go looking for a qpr.
  15. 4 points
    This poll doesn't really cover what I want at all... I want "purely platonic friendship", yes, but the views I have on friendship/what I want from a friendship generally are a bit different from how allo society conceptualizes friendships. I would also be interested in a sexual relationship, but I do not consider it "romantic coded" and am not comfortable with checking of an option that implies that I want anything of the sort, given that I'm very romance repulsed.
  16. 4 points
    Hello fellow aros! Just wanted to let you all know there's a new book coming out today by aromantic author Ashia Monet. The book features aro-spec characters and no romance arc. It's a YA novel about a found family of magicians who go on a road trip to save the world. The title is The Black Veins, it's the first in the Dead Magic series, and you can buy it here: https://theblackveins.carrd.co/
  17. 4 points
    I'm not sure that the use of nonamorous is going to help ( as evidenced by like, our entire community ), and the implication that personal narratives have little value or aren't useful is somewhat annoying. As for the question of how it's happening... It's relatively easy to figure out. On one hand, many aromantic people enjoy sexual relationships, committed or nah. Many others are involved in romantic relationships, and still more are involved in queerplatonic relationships. These relationships, per societal norms, are considered "beyond" or "more complex" than typical friendship, and thus, merit a lot of discussion on how to approach and deal with them within our community. And we do! We talk a lot about how to function in relationships, how to approach our partners, etc etc so on and so forth until the end of time. What I've found is that we don't talk as much about how to deal with friendships, or touch starvation due to no relationships/friends reading it as romo, how to do life when you're not going on dates and don't necessarily have a partner and that kind of thing. When we do, we don't talk about it as much - I've seen a couple glancing posts that touch on it, but in comparison to the vast amount of content available on QPRs alone, it can feel kind of overwhelming. I don't necessarily have an excellent solution, but the problem isn't a lack of language or even a single narrative being promoted. Imo, it's a matter of having a vast amount of content to discuss and people to discuss it with, vs. a smaller section of the community with different needs that aren't being addressed on an equal level.
  18. 4 points
    Mark: "here's some facts about disabled people" Spacenik: "how dARE YOU?? This is way too PC!! how can people post facts i hate this place" Giving information about disability isn't "insane" or "an echo chamber" its just,,, factual? Why is that so offensive to you Spacenik?
  19. 4 points
    Autistic people aren't lesser, and the community is very actively against 'cure' rhetoric, autism is an inherent part of who we are as people; to take it away would remove all that makes us us. We are healthy. Autism isn't an illness. If autistic people suffer it's not inherent to being autistic; it'h/s an issue of society, of bullying, and refusal to accommodate us, why not aim to fix that instead of completely changing who we are as people?
  20. 4 points
    The hell? I understand why it would be. You had no reason to anticipate that on an aro forum, of all places, you'd get told you're wrong for how you identify. That guy's completely out of line and I'm sorry you had to see that. A part of why I brought you those links in my first post here is that there are people like you who identify with the asexual umbrella, and much of the asexual community does support that. Please, don't let yourself feel run out of your identity by one singular allosexual. It's also okay to change how you identify, but also, understand, he's no real authority on any of it. I'm frankly distraught at the idea that heterosexuals in the aro community could be dictating who is and isn't allowed to identify as asexual.
  21. 4 points
    In my opinion, the rarely used terms do have a reason to exist as they can be useful when discussion inside one community/on one site. I for example identify broadly as aromantic, but if I talked about it with someone I would specify it to be romance indifferent aro/cupioromatic. In order to prevent keeping old labels alive I think the best option would be to make it standard to include (often used synonymous to .... ) and (rarely used) in the discription. I'm not a fan of an asterisk as this seems to be quite black and white and depends on the glossary being up to date all the time.
  22. 4 points
    Speaking for myself only: I don't really find I am denied any important political rights as a result of my romantic orientation (or lack thereof). By historical standards, I seem to have an enormous amount of freedom to live my life in the way I choose to. The issue for me is not so much feeling actively persecuted by social/legal structures*, but more just struggling to find IRL people on the same wavelength as me (in interpersonal relationsips, yes, but also in other aspects). But I wouldn't seek to frame that as a political issue. I just find it a bit personally disappointing I think part of what @Spacenik86 is getting at is a tendency for the internet to fragment peòple into quite niche online 'communities' which can then, by design, become largely insulated from outside criticism (constructive or otherwise). This can, perhaps, tend to make people overly defensive and somewhat unprepared for when they venture outside that community and encounter actual contrary views? (I've tried to phrase that last paragraph as politely as possible; I'm sure you're aware of less polite phrasings of it!) What @Holmbo mentioned does strike me as a big cultural blind-spot though. As in, it would be nice if conceps like "romantic harrasment" and "romantic consent" were anywhere near as universally acknowledged as the analagous concepts of "sexual harrasment" and "sexual consent". *You can make the case that existing legal frameworks privilege marriage and aren't good at legitimising other relationship archetypes, sure. Like Elizabeth Brake did in Minimizing Marriage. But she wasn't exactly calling for revolution on all fronts in that book! More like liberal reforms/tweaks to an existing contract law framework that already grants people the core political freedoms, but is currenly a bit inflexible in the inter-personal space.
  23. 4 points
    I mean, are YOU really going to lecture me about asexuality?
  24. 4 points
    A lot of these are intertwined with combating the norm of the nuclear family, I figure. You've mentioned the polyamorous community and "the queer community" as communities with overlapping goals and aims here, and to that I'd also add decolonialists and anticapitalists. lmao, is that something that started in the 2010s, or is that just when you started paying attention? Do you think people are being inappropriate when they wear wedding rings or mention their spouses at work?
  25. 4 points
    I'm really angry that this person couldn't take no for an answer. I'm proud of you for sticking your ground and trying your best to make things work. I think you also know inside that none of this was your fault. There are people who just don't understand and I'm sorry you had to deal with that. From interacting with the alloros I know (so, all of my in-person friends), I think he didn't tell you honestly because he took things for granted. A lot of alloros take any sort of intimacy as inherently romantic, even when you say it's not. It's just what they were taught growing up. Being close to someone emotionally means being in love, or something. It takes re-training on their part to get rid of these assumptions. Alternatively, he really was just manipulating you into liking him back, which is a shitty move on his part, but to do that he had to get you to trust him. I think what happened was that you were just being yourself, he took your words and actions as romantic when they weren't, and then he was nice back (i.e., "reciprocated"), and you took it as him being nice/being comfortable around you as a friend. I'm unfortunately a cynical person when it comes to reacting to people having crushes on me. It happens often that they have a crush on me and when I say I'm not interested, they still try to woo me (whether at that moment or just try again in the future). When I talk through things with those people, our relationship usually dies. So I try to be very careful when I interact with people, making sure that I punctuate being "friends" (by saying "You're a good friend" and things like that as often as I can). This seems to be mostly successful, but I don't really get to be my genuine self. I also sometimes run away though. If it really stresses you out, you aren't obligated to stay and try to make it work. You have the right to choose. But also know that I (and some of the people above) have had very successful friendships with people that had crushes. For me, they've been pretty rare, but there do exist people who will respect you when you say no. Ultimately, you're not responsible for anyone else's feelings. I know it can feel like you've done something wrong or that you can do better, but it really isn't up to you. They are the ones experiencing attraction and attraction isn't action. They make the choice whether or not to act on their feelings, knowing full well how you might feel or react, so the responsibility to deal with their feelings is on them. Keep being you, because I think you have been handling situations like these wonderfully, and if they don't respect you, they need to be better.
  26. 4 points
    Firstly, it wouldn't be mixed up with the autism spectrum, a-spec has been used specifically for ace & aro, and the misconception that it is appropriating language from the autistic community was spread by exclusionists to discredit us. As for shortening name while still conserving searchability....I'd say change "Social Group" to a single word, such as community or just group. Additionally, you can reframe the way it mentions the places, so perhaps "Ace and Aro Group (at/of) Liverpool & Wirral". This would make the actual name "Ace & Aro Group" with a sub-title for the places. Aside from the name, you might also want to mention in the description of your group that it is inclusive to "Anyone who is ace and or aro, including aro allos" etc. to make it more explicitly inclusive. Secondly, one subtle thing which I think actually is very impactful is being cognizant of the colors you use on things. If I see an organization that's labelled ace and aro, but everything on their website/etc is purple and there's no green, then I'd interpret that to mean they're heavily ace-focused and they haven't actively worked towards aro inclusion aside from just tagging it on to the name. So visual representation of stuff should generally be equivalent. (On a related point, if you're going to list out demisexual and gray asexual in something alongside aromantic, include the corresponding aromantic identities too because otherwise it kinda implies that aromantic is yet another sub-category of asexual when it's not). Other suggestions for community building & inclusion: I talked to some people who organized an ace group who were talking about how there was a need to have some meetings for demisexual/gray-asexual/sex favorable aces to talk about those things while not making sex-repulsed aces uncomfortable, so balancing those community needs. Point being, it might be useful to have some meetings which are specified as open to more discussion on sexual things, making it more welcoming to aromantic allosexuals along with aces who are more sex-favorable. (though, feasibility of that kinda depends on if you or another organizer feel comfortable facilitating such discussions, or if enough people in your group would be interested in such a thing, but it is something to consider). Another thing to consider is romance repulsion; one of the things which initially made me more distanced from the ace community was that so many discussions seemed to revolve around romance. And this doesn't mean having to make it outright not allowed, but generally making it clear that people who are romance repulsed can be accommodated to feel comfortable in the discussion, similar to how you'd treat sex repulsion. (I've had ace people I knew irl outright dismiss me when I expressed discomfort with something because of romance repulsion, and generally issues with that have made me uncomfortable in an irl queer group because it was made clear that I couldn't even express my discomfort without people getting irritated with me about it, because unfortunately society really doesn't respect romance repulsion). Resources you might be interested in: https://www.aromanticism.org/news-feed/community-building This talks about community building stuff in general, but there is some stuff specifically about aro spaces and stuff too. https://www.aromanticism.org/en/resources-1 This has lots of aro resources, but if you scroll down to "offline resources" there are several groups listed which might give you some inspiration for naming things.
  27. 4 points
    tbh some people will even think that if you do come out. like they can't accept that you're not romantically and/or sexually attracted to anyone; they think you're hiding or repressing that attraction, whatever gender(s) they think it's towards. like i told a friend my orientation and we were talking about platonic relationships and i talked about my best friend and he said "i think you love her romantically". he thought it was more likely that i'm heterosexual and homoromantic than het aro. not that that's not a possible combination, but it's not common, and more importantly, i'd told him my orientation and my platonic feelings for my friend! another friend thought that since i'm virgin i must be gay or religious (i am that, but that's not the reason). others assume my lgbt+ community involvement/allyship must mean i'm gay or bi. and of course pretty much everyone who detects any indication of my heterosexuality assumes i'm also heteroromantic, though probably unconsciously. all this to say, it kinda sucks, but it just be like that. like the others said here, you can tell people your orientation or not, that's your choice, but either way they can make assumptions you might not be able to change. just like, try to associate with people who don't make you uncomfortable and remember that what you know is more important than what others think.
  28. 4 points
    in conversation, my coworker said she didn't want to assume i wanted to marry a man, so i said "i don't want to marry anyone, but i like guys." how's that for a vague but accurate summary of my orientation? on the spot, too.
  29. 4 points
    Saw the first Twilight movie, never get so bored in my life. There is no plot at all : just two te ens falling in love for 2 hours. And let's not forget how the love triangle is solved in twilight 4 : in fact Jacob was never in love with Bella, he was in love with the part of her that will become her daughter (but somehow not the part of Edwards that will become hus daughter, I guess someone doesn't know how biologique works...). He literally has a crush on a baby (well they don't call it a crush, but he asks Edward if he can call him dad, meaning he intends to marre his daughter when she will be old enough). What was the author thinking? Also, Sierra Burgess is a loser. The girl catfish a guy, kisses him while he was thinking he kisses someone else. But he still dates her at the end because she write a song to apologize. What?
  30. 3 points
    I made this, as a basic concept for an aspec flag Black - lack of attraction purple- asexuality green-aromanticism white- community blue-aplatonic grey-spectrum of identities. what do people think? ♥
  31. 3 points
    Maybe "there's someone for everyone"? Its used to mean that every person has someone who will be a good fit for them romantically and I know for a fact there's no one for me.
  32. 3 points
    It's a pretty flag. I like that you chose six stripes - it departs from both the aro and ace flags and makes it unique. The greater number of stripes also makes sense for a big community. I think the grey could maybe be a little lighter to better differentiate it from the black (perhaps #999999) but it's otherwise nice in terms of contrast. The green and purple might be a bit too much of a contrast, but for me personally, only the green is a little too bright. One thing I'm worried about is that the inclusion of blue makes it look similar to @Magni's aroace flag. In general, though, there is a longstanding debate about what should be used as a-spec (umbrella) flag colours vs. aroace (specific identity) flag colours. So as far as I'm concerned, you can do whatever you want hahaha. There are a few other a-spec flags out there, yes. I compiled a post of the ones I knew of recently HERE.
  33. 3 points
    I would refrain from this kind of armchair psychology.
  34. 3 points
    100% a real problem - I'd say that it'd be good to be able to choose someone you trust to be your uhh proxy/plenipotentiary for situations like medical decisions, having access to your medical records. Marriage is also simplifying the issues of inheritance, but I guess this mostly would be an issue for people who do have partners, but don't get married. In terms of both of those, allying with poly and queer partnering people (where they don't have the option to get married) would be beneficial - it's harder to ignore a bigger group of people With adoption I'll just say +1. This is a big issue for aromantics and singles in general, so especially single aromantics. Discrimination can have many faces, like someone noticed it doesn't have to be firing someone for being aro. It can also being overlooked in promoting, having a lower salary (someone who's single doesn't need the money anyway am I right??* *note: yes, this is right, but in the current climate "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" isn't working out anyway, right?? right), being forced to work at hours/on days no one wants to work, being excluded socially, etc. Here alignment with singles that aren't aro and childless people and women who have families, but earn less than men who have families would make us a bigger group Talked some about medical stuff in marriage too, so won't repeat that addition. But here I believe a change of mentality is needed - singles receive worse treatment, because their lives are perceived as being less worth saving *shrug*. It's a real problem that should be brought to attention of more people, but probably not something that can be solved by legislation. Activist groups would be great too hehe. But yes, some solutions for people who don't have that familial/spousal support network is needed and should be talked about. If we can't provide a kid with 100% responsible, stable, mature, conventional hetero couple, it's better for them to rot in orphanages where they have oh so great adult oversight and opportunities aplenty, clearly. Cool cool. Yeah, but it's still for couples, leaving poly and other non-duo friend constellations with no options. Yes! All the more likely those problems will find solutions The only thing I'd be wary of would be the amatonormative mentality of "well, but I'll get a partner eventually and it won't affect me anymore" of some of those people. The society generally holds the belief that giving greater advantage to marrieds with children is 100% right. Contact sports 😜 Good old sex work 😜 New career opportunities for professional cuddlers 😜 But for real now - maybe there will appear some ways to fulfill those needs that aren't here today. Meanwhile we can focus on mentality in which toching friends could happen more often. Mmm, great point. I, uh, thought that this is what we were discussion here, reforms that would legitimize lifestyles other than hetero couple marriage. I don't think anything that's been said here called for a revolution. It can be a fantasy only, but at least sometimes the kids can pay for the nursing homes. To have more extra money, it'd be cool to have the same salary that people who have children and/or families do And people can be minimalist and not think about some far-away prospects of "having money for retirement", sigh, especially if they're working tiring but underpaid jobs. So here I'd focus on first allowing people to have the money they can leave for later (or invest) and then encouraging them to do so. This can always be changed This would be the best option lbr. Realistically?? The kind of society that no longer tells the elderly to get their stuff and leave the household when they can't work anymore and the family can't spare the freeloaders. I'm gonna... take a wild guess and... assume that most people here don't live in either of those countries. And if they do... they can probably recognize what their priorities are... And as a person not living in NK or SA, I always I think I can aim higher than "not fearing for my life 24/7", for example aiming for "the best standard of life and equality for all in the place where I live" This is my view too - this doesn't have to fly under the banner of "making the world a better place for aromantics, but aromantics only, if you want to benefit from this, you have to show your aro card". In my understanding those are issues that also impact aros and as a group we could be working on allying with other impacted groups to make the changes that are benefiting all...?? I’m always surprised how many people regard laws as good instruments to change attitudes and for reeducation. Oh boy, who said anything about reeducation by law..?? And what kind of reeducation would that be...?? Because the line "away from pair-bonding" makes me think someone was suggesting abolishing options of legal pair-bonding here.............?? I thought I read a thread about changing and adjusting policies that currently don't include people who aren't pair-bonded. Great point!
  35. 3 points
    The word to refer to people who's gender you know is they, Just trans person, or transgender person, transgendered is like calling someone a talled person. That's a woman, statistically; that person would use she/her pronouns. Her genitals dont affect which pronouns she uses. Singular they exists, use it. It's been around for a very long time and is actually a neutral pronoun, calling people e/em when they havent told you those are their pronouns is misgendering. Calling trans women e/em when they havent told you those are their pronouns is misgendering. Use they/them for anyone who's pronouns you don't know, or just dont use pronouns.
  36. 3 points
    I do think for younger, financially-secure, and/or abled people there aren't a lot of issues (not that I'm saying you're any of those) but once you consider other factors money becomes a big issue. So, for one, kids are expected to take care of their parents when they get older. And I think it's probably safe to say that aros are either less likely to want kids, don't have the proper supports to raise kids as a single parent, or can't adopt because of legal barriers. Disabled people also have a lot of issues such as having higher healthcare costs and needing more support in general, and while sometimes having a romantic partner can alleviate some of that we also need to make sure that we're providing proper care for all disabled people, not just ones in relationships. Then there's the harassment many of us have received due to things like the Tumblr flamewars- probably not the most traditional political thing but considering it was a campaign that was trying to construct us as being fundamentally evil for existing, I'd say that's pretty damn political. And these are just the ones I came up at a moment's notice.
  37. 3 points
    I've not come out as aro to many people overall. Most of the time the topic doesn't come up. But when I have it has always been by starting to explain the concept of aromanticism. Yesterday a person I've recently got to know better told me he had a crush on me. I decided to respond differently than I used to. Rather than to get into the terms I just said: I don't date. And then explained I don't have an interest in romantic relationships. Not until we had talked for a while did I mention the term, when he asked me if I was asexual. I've decided I much prefer this approach to coming out since it's more about my choices than some uncontrollable orientation. And I wanted to share it in case someone else might be looking for a different approach too.
  38. 3 points
    I don't think it's a part of heteronormativity either. Homosexuals and bisexuals can be amatonormative too. Amatonormativity can't be reduced to heteronormativity, even if it is a part of it. I think it's more general than that.
  39. 3 points
    I'm happy to tell you that they do now! Just implemented it, actually - it applies to the entire News Feed. 😊 On a more personal perspective, I really like this as an outreach strategy. I don't necessarily think it's 100% foolproof, but I think it certainly helps to find common ground with other queer people to help transition the conversation. I do wonder though, how this might impact later discussions on amatonormativity in queer communities, because I don't find that I entirely agree with the perspective that it's a part of heternormativity. If we frame it that way in our original approach and then attempt to discuss amatonormativity in, for example, the focus on gay marriage as one of the major tenements of LGBTQ+ rights, that we as a community may get the reaction of having to re-educate after introducing it in that manner, because the thought will be "I'm [x-identity], there's no way I can be amatonormative! That's a part of heternormativity, and I'm not a part of that!". (Although, I suppose that is somewhat inevitable.)
  40. 3 points
    I feel this way a lot. I get the feeling that most people around me are going to want to be with their partners most of the time as I get older and I'll be less able to be close to anyone as a result.
  41. 3 points
    Ok this, despite being the number one answer an aro could get, it never occurred to me... til two days ago, when I told my mom (she was talking about some her collegues and how they said they were aro and how amazing women they are, so I took the chance) and among other things, she said that. I rolled my eyes so much. I also discovered that my granma was aro! Mom told me stuff about her that made me realize it! Amazing, and she never knew there's a name for this way of being...
  42. 3 points
    I told my cousin that I don't want a girlfriend, and she said something like Alright, women are baad. I also told a guy friend twice, but he ignored that and kept asking about my dating life. He probably thought I was temporarily disaffected after a failed attempt at a relationship in 2017.
  43. 3 points
    Yeah I'm not arguing for replacing the definition or anything like that. The one thing we in this forum have in common is this lack. I was just curious how people personally would describe it in another way. It's gonna differ for everyone. I think it's important to explore differences between aros to though, exactly for that reason of common misconceptions.
  44. 3 points
    Hm just as someone who was involved a lot with the ace flamewars on Tumblr I'm not sure how much of a difference this is going to make as far as earning respect from other orgs. Aces on there really, really, doubled down on the "asexuality just means no sexual attraction" definition as a response to the claim that aces were just "losers who think they're special just because they don't want to fuck" and "incels". This did nothing to stop the harassment however. Of course, I doubt that queer orgs will be quite this hostile but I think we should maybe take that as an opportunity- why not go the whole way and try and get as much support for everyone in our community as we can? From an education standpoint too, it will let us give information so that more people may identify as aromantic than would have otherwise. Just from my own experiences with "graysexual", it took me five years between hearing the term to finding this post that Siggy wrote and this description of a greysexual narrative: Which was an experience that I had certainly had, but never thought about in the context of greysexuality- even though I had identified as such in the past! But that was because the only definition I had seen up to that point had been "experiences attraction infrequently". I had drifted away from using that label though, precisely because I thought that I was having the weird in-between feelings of not quite sexual attraction too frequently for me to use "greysexual". I was lucky enough to stumble across a greysexual narrative because I was still a participant in the broader ace community, but what if I hadn't been, and instead felt completely alienated by both asexuality and allosexuality? I think if our definition is too narrow, we risk having people who might have otherwise identified with aromanticism simply not joining the community in the first place- and if participating in our community is the only place where more complex narratives emerge, then I do think we run the risk of alienating many of our own simply because we prioritized certain narratives.
  45. 3 points
    With all due respect, what you're talking about here -- saying there's no choice but to oversimplify things in order to appeal to the sensibilities of more powerful people -- sounds like the ethos of respectability politics. Anyway, I think it's a false dilemma. There's always the option of something as tautological as "People are aromantic if they feel like aromantic experiences [of some kind] describe them somehow," with an addition like "absence of romantic attraction, distaste for romance, or disinterest in romantic relationships are some examples of what can be considered aromantic experiences." If that's "too much diversity" from someone's point of view, then the problem is their attitude, not the string of words. Are you really asking? The only definition I've ever seen of cupioromantic (including here and on AUREA) involves wanting a romantic relationship, not just "not being repulsed." Those two things are hardly interchangeable. What the hell? Who are you to tell people what they "really" are? Aromantics call themselves aromantic for more than just one reason, and greyros don't all call themselves greyro just because of romantic attraction. If you look at threads like Why do you identify as gray-romantic?, you'll find a mix of different responses, and there are also greyros who are uncomfortable with being assumed to experience romantic attraction. Attraction isn't the be all end all of everything. Some people aren't even sure when they are or aren't feeling it. Any discussion of greyness needs to account for that. The whole premise is a social construct anyway -- what do you even mean "isn't practical"?
  46. 3 points
    Going off of that, I think there’s a desire not to think of aromanticism as a lack of something because “defining against” is something that’s looked down on. It’s a bad thing when you’re speaking about politics or culture/ethnocentrism etc. But there’s no harm in saying aromanticism is a lack of romantic attraction just like it makes sense to say a blind person lacks eyesight. A blind person might also argue that their sense of hearing is heightened, but that’s a personal identification in addition to the basic definition of blindness. So you can go ahead and say being aromantic makes you more focused on your friends or your career, but I think that’s a very individual choice.
  47. 3 points
    @nonmerci I’ve actually hinted that I’m asexual (to my college friends not my family) because I know that being asexual is more understood and has more awareness. But I also don’t have crushes and I know aromanticism isn’t as close to being popular among average people and they wouldn’t understand. Even for other people like my moms friend or people who barely know me I don’t want want to explain myself to them. I don’t think I owe people who aren’t in my life a run down explanation of my aromanticism and asexuality. And wooow lol I guess I just found the answer. My closest friends know about me being aro ace so it’s no big deal. But with new friends it’s a sensitive topic and I don’t know what they’ll understand about being a romantic and not having romantic attraction without viewing me as someone’s who’s weird. Have you told your family? @NullVector thank you a lot. What you said reminded me I can’t control what people think of me based on incomplete information. I just find it dumb how based on how I dress people want to assume I’m gay and make awkward ineudnos about it I’m just like?? I’m not gay, you’re just making me feel uncomfortable by assuming I’m gay. But they interpret that uncomfortbleness as me being closested! You really can’t win in these situations and I hate it. From now on I’m going to have the mindset that I can’t control what others think about me because it’s impossible and exhausting to even try. So those assumptions will be theirs to carry and not mine
  48. 3 points
    Why not tell them the truth? If people assuming your sexuality or pretending to be straight makes you uncomfortable, it seems the right thing to do. That's not easy, in particular if they don't know about aro and ace, but in the end it will make you feel better. Because even if people don't believe you, at least you will be true to yourself.
  49. 3 points
    I... I am aro-allo, and I literally invented voidpunk. Voidpunk is not just for aroaces, nor just for aros in general. Please don't perpetuate the problem of crediting all of aro culture to aroaces.
  50. 3 points
    Old enough to talk. Getting told "you're too young to know that" is a common experience to all sorts of people who aren't straight (or cisgender, for that matter). It's a double standard, because those same people probably wouldn't have told you "you're too young to know that, maybe it'll change" if what you had said was "I'm straight." They're just generalizing based off of what's more familiar to them. It's a type of reaction to expect from people -- but not something to take to heart. It's okay to identify as aromantic if that's the term that feels right to you. No matter how old or young you are. I promise.
  • Create New...